tv Inside Story 2017 Ep 278 Al Jazeera October 7, 2017 10:32am-11:00am AST
this little boy is now in sole charge of his four siblings. u.s. forecasters say a tropical storm they it has become a hurricane as it bears down on the u.s. gulf coast it's already bad in central america with at least twenty five people killed in flooding and landslides across costa rica nicaragua on villages and el salvador. a makeshift area where residents are laying flowers will be turned into a permanent memorial for fifty eight people shot dead by a gunman in las vegas on sunday but he said they haven't yet established the motion of sixty four year old stephen paddick who carried out the attack caution on his regional president has met community leaders in barcelona to discuss what to do after sunday's referendum the group includes lawyers academics and members of the barcelona football club catalan separatist leaders say they're planning to go ahead with secession despite a band from the spanish central government tens of thousands of people have paid their last respects to former iraqi president and kurdish leader. he was laid to
rest in his hometown of selema near he died on tuesday taliban once championed kurdish self rule before accepting the largely symbolic role of president in two thousand and three. and sad story is up next. on counting the cost u.s. billionaire president donald trump wants to cut taxes but how will his plan impact ordinary americans plain versus crap saloni of the economic implications plus comma given what's behind the collapse of australia's auto industry counting the cost at this time on i'll just weird. the historic international nuclear deal with iran could collapse a key deadline is looming and all eyes are on the us president donald trump you've never liked the accord can the agreement survive if washington gives it the thumbs down this is inside story. we're
. we're. hello and welcome to the program i'm to the u.s. president donald trump calls it an embarrassment and the worst deal ever but when iran and six countries reach to nuclear agreement two years ago it was seen as a landmark and now it could unravel well trump has to review the deal and decide if iran is keeping to its end of the bargain and whether it serves u.s. interests the deadline for him to make that decision is fast approaching the signatories to the deal say to her on is complying and they are against scrapping or modifying it a trump says iran is not living up to the spirit of the agreements. we must not allow iran to obtain to obtain nuclear weapons the iranian regime
supports terrorism and exports violence bloodshed and chaos across the middle east that is why we must put an end to iran's continued aggression and nuclear ambitions they have not lived up to the spirit of their agreement. while the iranian president hassan rouhani calls those allegations baseless during last month's un general assembly in new york he warned of a decisive and resolute response if any of the parties violated the deal and of the u.s. decides to withdraw from the pact iran says it could abandon the agreements altogether so the nuclear deal was signed back in twenty fifteen between to iran and six world powers the u.s. the u.k. france china russia and germany so what exactly does it involve while it was agreed sanctions against iran would be lifted in exchange for the government's curbing if its nuclear program the deal restricts among other things the amount of nuclear
fuel that iran can keep for the next fifteen years and prevents its ability to use to radioactive materials uranium and plutonium to create weapons to do that iran stockpile of low enriched uranium had to be reduced by ninety eight percent and two thirds of its installed centrifuges cuts the deal also calls for a sanctions to be imposed quickly if the agreement is violated and inspectors from the un's nuclear watchdog get access to iran's nuclear sites any time the agreement must be certified by the u.s. president every ninety days so the next deadline is october fifteenth and of donald trump doesn't certify it it'll be up to congress to decide what to do let's bring in our guests we have. he's a professor of world studies at the university of to her on joining us from washington d.c. is hillary mann leverett. as a former u.s. state department official and from vienna thought if the rules he's the former head of the verification and security policy coordination office at the international
atomic energy agency itself welcome to you all hellery man leverett's trump has certified this deal twice before why is he now expected to decertify its. well he has made clear through his presidential campaign and since he was inaugurated as president that he is not like this deal and his intention was to get out of this deal somehow he has pushed his his national security and foreign policy team since he took office to try and find a way out the problem for him is that there's not an easy way out there's no credible alternative to this deal and there is no problem on the iranian side the international agency that is charged with monitoring this deal the i.a.e.a. has never found a single violation of any credibility from the iranian side so that leaves president trumps team here with very little to work with they can't cite any technical violations as they call it of the agreement and they don't have and they
don't have an alternative so up until now president trump has essentially been in his own words forced to certify iran's compliance and to continue waving the sanctions what we understand is happening now though is that his team has somehow come together with a policy that he can he could choose to adopt though it's not final he may not where he says that he that this agreement is not in u.s. vital national security interests he will not cite any real violations by iran but just say it's not in u.s. national security interests and then the congress would decide whether or not to reimpose saying sions which would take the united states out of the deal we'll talk about a number of issues that you raised in a moment but first let me just get a sense from each of my guests about where they think trump stands when it comes to do certifying to still talk over to you in vienna what it what is your sense of what the president is expected to do want to over the fifteenth. well u.s. media reports suggest that he will decertify with the iran but this will then mean
that the united states will be perceived as an unreliable partner it would be a blow to the u.n. security council because they're on dealing with sanctified by security council resolution twenty two thirty one and in the future countries would be reluctant to make agreements with the united states if they think that successive governments would abandon previously agreed deeds and this is also a quandary for international law of bunk the sort of some sort of hand up where a state is responsible for living up to its international legal obligations and these do not change just because there is a change in government it just to be perfectly clear if trump doesn't davies certify this deal then that doesn't mean that it is the end of the deal for eyes easy but how is it to her on looking at all of this. you know it's generally difficult to get iranians americans and europeans and the
same page and then you can in agreement was an instant that this actually happened and as you have been watching the reactions we have former wal-mart officials or administration officials writing op ed pieces. going on television shows defending the need to live a clean mint any ron president rouhani and. prime foreign minister zarif. are doing basically the same thing they worked very hard. research visit in new york to save the deal so there is a consensus basically among you don't ians europeans and. most american observateur of iran and the middle east politics that this is a good a commitment the problem that we have is donald trump's promised new campaign to
turn up the nuclear age limit and then we have a small minority of iran harks that don't like the agreement and what they are planning to do apparently is to have it both ways basically to have sanctions to have more sanctions and then at the same time not technically while at the agreement so they will have restrictions iran's nuclear program and this is not going to be good news for you know in a fissures that accepted the agreement the agreement the idea behind the agreement was to reduce sanctions not to increase sanctions and iran has the old feel like that says that this could begin in your mind around the wing of the. yes i think so because. nor iranian politician can justify putting severe the sections on the un's nuclear program and at the same time get a new sanctions alone reveal so this is going to be difficult for you don't know
officials to continue it and i think this is going to put the nuclear agreement in serious jeopardy hillary mann what's the strategy behind pushing the ball to congress. the strategy is is is in some ways not not so not so coherent and i think not readily understandable for those outside of washington it's not in fact as a priority to re-impose sanctions on iran what the strategy is is to build a sense essentially a united front between the white house and congress to work with the europeans to build in a pretext to force iran to commit some sort of violation of either the deal or of a european u.s. consensus now that may seem strange but they've made some significant progress with that what the trump ministration has done is they've really kept congress at bay
telling them we don't want to reimpose sanctions right now so you don't have a big call from congress to impose sanctions and then you see the trouble ministration worked very hard and very closely with in particular the french but also the british in particular with french president macaron to try to figure out is there a way that they could have a what they would call a supplemental agreement the united states because negotiate renegotiating the agreement and the europeans can call it a supplement that would address other issues which the united states wants to bring out like iran's missile program like iran's support for groups such as hezbollah and others other things that have long been on the u.s. list of what they may describe as concerns about iranian behavior the point of that would be to push iran to not accept it and for iran to be the one that collapses the nucular deal that's essentially what the strategy is coming forward and i think
will be unveiled next week though of course president trump can decide anything at the last minute as he's want to do so what you're saying is that the trumpet ministration is looking to challenge iran on a number of other fronts without breaking the nuclear agreements. yes and two principle ways to gain consensus with the europeans to add additional areas with which to force iran to negotiate on the ballistic pro ballistic missile program and on iran support for various groups in the middle east and then the second area very importantly would be to push the i.a.e.a. to push here the europeans to support this in the i.a.e.a. the international organization charged with monitoring the nucular agreement to push them to insist on inspecting other sites that are not necessarily sites that have been declared nucular sites for example military sites conventional military sites the united states has long wanted access to those in iran and so those are the avenues that the trauma ministration sees possibilities for gaining more
leverage these would be the europeans and against iran to have an entirely new set of ground rules for how the united states works in the middle east tara could overcome the europeans be pushed on such issues in your opinion and what do you think their european response is going to be to all of this is if trump actually decertified the deal we have heard from the president the french president mccall who is saying that there is no alternative to the nuclear of course what do they do well just this morning the european union issued a statement saying that iran nuclear deal was the best way forward for a long term solution of the iranian nuclear file and that all parties should abide by this agreement. if the congress imposes new sanctions on iran that are not nuclear related but the sanctions impact on european businesses extractor toria extraterritorial e then you will have
a problem and will need to decide whether they also pull out or whether they continue to maintain this deal and support their industries that are targeted by the exchequer in order to sanctions by the u.s. if however congress passes sanctions that. us specific and they do not being alive european businesses and banks then we are in a different situation but regardless i think european businesses will feel will feel the chill and would be very concerned about hefty fines being imposed on them as has been done in the past so how much pressure is this going to put on european allies to say it's a get out of the deal well the iran agreement is the single main accomplishment of the european union as the union so i think there will bass very hard to preserve this deal and also endeavor to continue its implementation even if the u.s. backs out of the deal i.a.e.a. inspections continue in iran under iran's agreement with the i.a.e.a.
pursuant to the nuclear nonproliferation treaty and then there are separate mental inspections under the joint comprehensive plan of action and i.a.e.a. already has the authority under iran's voluntary implementation of its additional protocol to seek access to sites that are not declared as nuclear but there is a mechanism under which iran can provide satisfaction to their concerns short of providing access and there is something called managed access underweight juran good except visits to military sites. on specific for specific purposes where persist so to speak a frog or is that it would you like to respond to that's my guest from vienna and also tell us does this in any way if the deal worth to unravel if a tram does decertified and then congress impose a sanctions does the same courage iran then to restart its nuclear program. yes i think if the u.s.
gets out of the nation in agreement it would be difficult for the iranian government to a say in it because after all the major sanctions that we have. are u.s. sanctions and because of the snapback mccann ism and the un us will have the ability to bring the u.n. sanctions back as well so this is not going to be acceptable for you and there are some people in iran that are saying that iran not only should get out of the new can in agreement you don't should get out of the n.p.t. nonproliferation treaty because after all being part of n.p.t. should have some benefits for the countries that have signed the agreement and from the one nine hundred sixty s. up to now nobody can present any evidence that n.p.t. has been good for iraq so this is going to be something very serious for the future if you don't see a clear program you know he's not interested in making a nuclear weapon but iran does not want to be. following saddam hussein in terms of
allowing different inspectors generally generally some of them at least linked to intelligence services to be visiting you know indian military sites that's what saddam did and remember what happened to him so the idea is not only to get kind words from europeans what iran wants when europeans and concrete actions for example suing the u.s. under their duty all passing legislation at the e.u. basically protecting you companies that are dealing with you on these concrete actions actually can benefit you don't and politicians if they want to argue in terms of saying in their nuclear agreement but if you just goes along with us then i think the nuclear agreement is going to end. hillary mann leverett in his speech to the u.n.
general assembly that is last month described as one of the worst and most one sided transactions the u.s. has ever and has ever entered into and he calls it an embarrassment that at the same time you have the defense secretary james mattis would just recently when asked whether he believed that the iran deal was in the national interest of the country he said yes i do what do you make of these different comments well in fact i would i would go back just a little bit further to the obama administration even though this agreement was hailed as a tremendous victory the signature achievement of the obama administration in foreign policy even president obama did not have the political will to submit this agreement to the congress as a kind of treaty which would bound the united states and any future administration so we would not even be in the situation if president obama had had the political will to submit it to congress it would have bounced future administrations it would
have been a binding agreement for the united states under international law. because president obama didn't do it because the congress wouldn't accept it there is there has always been i would call it a vocal but very well funded and extreme part of the american policy elite that sees the u.s. invasion for example of iraq and the overthrow of saddam hussein and even before that as professor i thought he was pointing out the massive sanctions and sanctions mechanism that him imposed on iraq they see all of that as successful because it brought down massive iraki arab military power in the middle east they see that as a success never mind the people that died there but they see that as this as a success what's happening now is that same small group of people are now being essentially empowered not just in congress but at the at the cia within the white house to have influence over us u.s. policy direction what's holding them back is not
a group that presents an alternative not a group that says hey we could work with the islamic republic of iran it's an important power we can work with where our interests overlap and we could negotiate where they where they diverge no this alternate group says iran is still a bad actor but the united states much must respect its agreements and we can push iran and other ways that group is personified by secretary of state tillerson secretary of defense mattis and probably national security adviser mcmaster in the white house so there is this debate there is a conflict within the administration but it's not a conflict between two real alternative views it's basically a view that sees iran as another target like saddam hussein's iraq and and the the other view that sees iran still as a bad player but can be undermined in other ways where the united states doesn't have to break its word in the nuclear agreement well a group that campaigns for the total ban of nuclear weapons has been now awarded the nobel peace prize so the nobel committee said it wanted to honor the work done
by the international campaign to abolish new. our weapons especially with the increased threat of nuclear conflict listen we are sending messages in fact to all states but also in particular to nuclear weapon states. because it is a fact that states are in a different situation the majority of the states of the world who have. signed the ban treaty can do so without an immediate consequence on. their armies and the air they don't have to disarm we're of course nuclear states are in a different position and we do realize that it has to be a slower process for them but the message we are sending is to remind them of the commitments that they have already made that they also are obliged
to work for in nuclear free world so that happened recently let's just broaden out the discussion for just a moment thought it over for america pulls out of a quarrel with iran what is the message there that is being sent to countries like north korea for example. well i think the message particularly to north korea would be that it's not worth making a deal with that washington because there is no certainty that the current government or a future government would abide by such an agreement the international community of more than one hundred twenty two states is fent the clear message by approving this treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons which has already been signed on the very fifth day that it opened for signature by more than fifty countries and already ratified by three of them and as the prize committee chair was just mentioning in your clip the five nuclear weapons they thought already obligated
under the nuclear nonproliferation treaty to end the nuclear arms race and to work through its nuclear disarmament with the award of the nobel peace prize to this international campaign for the abolition of nuclear weapons which represents a broad coalition in many different countries it's a very clear message that nuclear weapons no longer play a role in today's international security challenges nuclear weapons are not useful in solving the problems in the middle east and nuclear weapons certainly are not useful in solving the issue with the north koreans but hillary mann leverett isn't there a bit of a double standard here when the focus is on iran and now the threat is that the the deal might unravel and then you have countries for example israel who has nuclear capabilities yet no one talks about that especially in washington sure absolutely i mean even not even with iran itself before you know before the revolution and one nine hundred seventy nine the united states supported the shah of iran having not
just a nuclear capability but we supported his development of nuclear weapons that's how this whole thing even starts in iran with the nuclear cooperation with the united states because the united states wanted the shah of iran to have nuclear weapons as we have supported israel's acquisition of nuclear weapons the double standards are are far too many and too deep to to recount or. but it's not just how the united states reacted to the iran agreement it's also what the united states did to libya after libya agreed to dismantle all of its nuclear and other other weapons programs but i think significantly although it sends a very important message the nobel peace prize to this organization it's very important to keep reality where it is in terms of what's happening in washington all right idea that the united states would no longer use nucular weapons is no longer is no longer there there is now a discussion that the united states could actually use what they call tactical
percentage and guided nuclear weapons to achieve goals that's very much back on the table in washington. as a final word to you just tell us how much work it rhonda will put will put in to try and save this deal with the u.s. as well as with your up in just thirty seconds or so. you know you know you know it's funny that if miss mogilny. foreign policy representative john kerry is on the short list of the nobel prize nobel peace prize this year this i think is an indication that this is actually getting rid of nuclear weapons if you can get all these two parties and. a nuclear agreement and you know and has been asking for many years for a nuclear free middle east and the people who have been opposing it. hawkish elements in washington that are in power the israeli government and
basically u.s. allies all right leave it there we thank you very much for joining us to all of my guests. hellery mann leverett and thought it out to thank you for speaking to us on inside story and thanks for watching you can see the program again any time by visiting our website al-jazeera dot com for further discussion you can go to our facebook page that's facebook dot com for its story you can also join the conversation on twitter our handle is at a.j. inside story from myself and the whole team here in the by for now. in the hash tag era when news coverage consists of a punk jihad line a five second sound bite and an easy solution. delve deep of them says
challenge the status quo expose double standards and debate the contradictions join me sunday for a new season of the show the frank. and up front. about this time i'll just hear it . with bureaus spawning six continents across the globe. correspondents live in the stories they tell. us about it. in world news optimism has faded. to lead is a divided. tension grows as fear is that a crackdown is imminent the targets the activists who fought for democracy
dividing com caught part five of the six part series filmed of a five years. on china's democracy experiment at this time on al-jazeera. facing realities the president said that there would be a complete audit a hundred percent audit that audit hasn't happened getting to the heart of the matter so are you saying then that the future of the g.c.c. will be in doubt. here the story. on talk to housing at this time. u.n. demands myanmar allow humanitarian access to rock on state of the.